Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
in the u.s. to be detained without charge or trial. the f.b.i. and other law enforcement agencies have proven time and time again that they are up to the challenge of detecting, stopping, arresting and convicting terrorists found on u.s. soil. having successly arrested, -- successfully detained, arrested, convicted hundreds of these heinous people both before and after 9/11. for example, since january, 2009, 98 individuals have been successfully arrested inside the united states by the f.b.i. and other federal or local law enforcement officers on terrorism-related charges. last month, staff of the senate intelligence committee compiled a list of the 95 individuals arrested in the past four years as part of more than 50 different terrorism investigations. the list was based on publicly available information from the f.b.i., the congressional research service and media reports. and i have it here and i would like to enter that list into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. feinstein: thank you very much. it is also important to understand that suspected terrorists w
to the normal criminal element. and the third is what f.b.i. director robert mueller said, there is a very real possibility trainees will recruit more terrorists from among the federal inmate population and continue al qaeda operations from the inside, which is how the new york synagogue bombers were recruited. all of these things are -- we shouldn't even be debating this. the ayotte amendment is one that would take care of this. we don't have to worry about it from year to year. we don't have to anguish over this thing that we've decided several times. i can remember, i guess it was back in the early administration of obama, when he identified 17 areas in the united states that would be appropriate for incarcerating terrorists, that we would take out of gitmo. and one of those places happened to be fort sill in my state of oklahoma. i went down to fort sill. i looked at the facility that we had that was housed within fort sill facility. and there was a lady there whose name was sergeant major carter. i can remember when she came up to me, she said, senator, why in the world -- go back and tell
on the specifics of the investigation. the fbi has its own protocols in terms of how they proceed. and i'm going to let director mueller and others examine those protocols, and make some statements to the public generally. i do want to emphasize what i said before. general petraeus had an extraordinary career. deserved this country with great distinction in iraq, in afghanistan, and as head of the cia. by his own assessment, he did not meet the standards that he felt were necessary as the director of cia with respect to this personal matter that he is now dealing with, with his family, and with his wife. and it's on that basis that he tendered his resignation, and it's on that basis that i accepted it. but i want to emphasize that from my perspective at least, he has provided this country and extraordinary service. we are safer because of the work that dave petraeus has done, and my main hope right now is that he and his family are able to move on, and that this instead of being -- this into a being a single side note on what has been otherwise been an extraordinary career. [inaudible] >> you kn
qaeda? is that right? so if our military is authorized to use force, they don't have to call the f.b.i. or the virginia state police to shoot. they can shoot themselves against an enemy coming at them in america. mr. levin: coming here and attacking us, a navy base or at a -- mr. graham: sliewlg. right. because we're not fighting a crime. we don't have to disarm our military and call the local cops, "would you please shoot these people they get here." no, we're going to shoot you. if you get in a boat asked to attack a military ship or boat in the united states, we're going to shoot you. and if we wound you, we're going to capture you. and then here's what we're going to do to you, incident of using force. the supreme court has said that when you authorize to use force, it makes no sense to give that authorization if you don't have the power to detain. because the worst thing you could do to the american military is to make them to kill everybody and capture no one. or let the other -- or let them go. so kill them all is not good policy and it's a bad spot to put your military in, and
don't have the fbi interviews of the survivors conducted one or two days after the attack. we don't have the basic information about what was said the night of the attack, as of this date. so i remember the episode pretty well. our democratic friends felt like a john bolton didn't have the information needed to make an informed decision about ambassador bolton's qualifications. john bolton, the then ambassador, and democratic saying we're not going to go, we're not going to consider this domination domination in till we get basic answers to our concern. all i can do is that the concerns i have are greater today than they were before, and we're not even close to getting the basic answers. [inaudible] >> i have many more questions that need to be answered. [inaudible] >> ambassador rice released a statement about that meeting with senators mccain, graham and kelly ayotte saying in part in the course of the meeting we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community and the initial assessment upon which they were based were incorrect in the key respect. there
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5